Search

College honors courses provide an opportunity to tackle controversial topics in an atmosphere that encourages active learning, critical thinking, and open discussion. This venue is particularly appropriate for examining the debate about teaching intelligent design (ID) in public school science classes. A one-credit honors enrichment seminar taught at the University of North Carolina Wilmington provides a model, with associated successes and challenges, for addressing the controversy. This interdisciplinary course consisted primarily of discussions based on a set of weekly readings that presented contrasting viewpoints on evolution and naturalism, ID, theology, and educational issues. In preparation for each class, students constructed charts contrasting the views of each writer on key points presented in the readings and summarizing their own responses. Discussion focused on a set of questions arising from the readings and designed to provoke debate. The "Kitzmiller v. Dover" decision served as a final case study; each student prepared a final paper defending or criticizing Judge Jones' decision in the Dover court case. Prior to the course, some students had not heard of ID and many had limited knowledge of evolution. The course improved student knowledge of evolution, ID, and the issues involved in the controversy, preparing them to make informed political decisions. Challenges included the uneven level of knowledge about evolution among students in this non-science course and the time constraints of a 1-credit course. In addition, because I had decided to serve as a facilitator and not press my opinions, misconceptions were more difficult to correct, although the variety of disciplines represented by the students allowed them to correct one another.

Experiential learning can be an effective way to teach many concepts, and evolution is no exception. We describe the pedagogical techniques, class structure and learning objectives, travel logistics, and impact of three undergraduate honors-level experiential learning seminars that combined teaching topics related to evolution with a field trip to the Galápagos Islands. One class took place in Spring 2002 focusing on animal behavior, biodiversity, and evolution (13 students), and the other two were held in Spring 2009, with one seminar focusing on international environmental policymaking (3 students) and the other on how the natural history of the Galápagos influenced the development of Darwin's thought (7 students). Qualitative comments from students illustrate both short and long term impact of the class on learning about evolution.

Describes the Moonsnail Project, which engages middle school students in discovery learning and the process of science by making them collaborators with scientists in the investigation of genuine scientific hypotheses. Reports on the first workshop held in summer 2001 and a scientific conference held in summer 2002 that provided vehicles for the assessment of student learning outcomes. (Author/KHR)

We test the hypothesis that escalated species (e.g., those with antipredatory adaptations such as heavy armor) are more vulnerable to extinctions caused by changes in climate. If this hypothesis is valid, recovery faunas after climate-related extinctions should include significantly fewer species with escalated shell characteristics, and escalated species should undergo greater rates of extinction than nonescalated species. This hypothesis is tested for the Cretaceous-Paleocene, Eocene-Oligocene, middle Miocene, and Pliocene-Pleistocene mass extinctions. Gastropod and bivalve molluscs from the U.S. coastal plain were evaluated for 10 shell characters that confer resistance to predators. Of 40 tests, one supported the hypothesis; highly ornamented gastropods underwent greater levels of Pliocene-Pleistocene extinction than did nonescalated species. All remaining tests were nonsignificant. The hypothesis that escalated species are more vulnerable to climate-related mass extinctions is not supported.